tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-55873462019-05-23T04:38:03.950-05:00Gordon's NotesCommentary: politics, science, technology and humanity. Secular humanist.JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.comBlogger42125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-20803615276539555562011-12-17T20:04:00.001-06:002011-12-17T20:04:43.203-06:00Netbooks<p><a href="http://gizmodo.com/5868692/when-dell-kills-off-netbooks-you-know-theyre-done-for-good">Dell has ended their Netbook line</a>.</p><p>That leaves Google's <a href="http://chrome.blogspot.com/2011/11/tis-season-for-chromebooks.html">Chromebooks</a>, which aren't exactly exciting.</p><p>I wasn't just a little wrong about <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/search/label/netbook">Netbooks</a>, I was <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">incredibly</a>, <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/netbook-train-rumbles-onwards-heading.html">unbelievably</a>, <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">totally</a> <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2011/08/computing-calculator-price-collapse-at.html">wrong</a>. <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2011/03/making-better-predictions.html">Again</a>.</p><p>I mean, this is friggin' ridiculous.</p><p>What happened?</p><p>I suppose it was <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/09/80-ultra-portable-in-unexpected-form.html">the pocket computer</a>. People with iPhones and the Android equivalent are already paying for most of what a Netbook can do. It doesn't make sense to pay for an extra monthly data plan, and a Netbook without net access is kind of a bust.</p><p>That leaves Windows notebooks, which are cheap but crummy. And MacBook Airs, which are not cheap but very amazing.</p><p>There's still the grade school and perhaps junior high school marketplace, but the iPad and Android equivalents are squeezing there too.</p><p>The Netbook looks like an evolutionary dead end. Maybe we'd have taken that road, but the iPhone blew a hole in it by mid-2007. I was writing in 2009; the bloody 3G was out then!</p><p>Damnit Netbook, you made a fool of me.</p><p><strong>See also</strong>:</p><ul><li><a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2011/03/making-better-predictions.html">Gordon's Notes: Making better predictions</a>: 2011/03, a precursor to this mea culpa. BTW, I also predicted China's bubble would burst before 2012. Not much time left for that to happen ...</li></ul>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-35509136356171813042011-03-03T13:05:00.002-06:002011-03-03T13:12:04.627-06:00iPad 2 - why I'm disappointed<a href="http://www.apple.com/ipad/">iPad</a> 2 is out. It's a wonderful bit of tech. I have no problems with the device hardware and software decisions.<br /><br />I'm still disappointed. Maybe because <i><u>I was wrong</u></i>.<br /><br />I was confident than iPad 2 would not <span style="font-style:italic;">require </span>a companion computer. I expected full Cloud integration, including device backup. I expected the base device would provide 3G access and come with affordable (capped) data plans that would allow basic email and net use (but not media consumption).<div><div><br /></div><div><a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/01/computing-for-rest-of-us-ipad-and.html">A year ago I expected that iPad 2 would be (net) "computing for the rest of us"</a>. I thought it would return to the lost promise of the original Mac vision, updated for the net world. I thought I'd buy one for my sister, and connect her to a world she's increasingly divorced from.</div><div><br /></div><div>That didn't happen. </div></div><div><br /></div><div>I'm disappointed.</div>John Gordon jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16788172186096983097noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-6048019565933995482010-10-20T21:00:00.001-05:002010-10-20T21:01:12.086-05:00The disruptive telecom play - the 3G iPod touchTelecom CEOs can be ... tiresome. Yes, they are evil, but it's a dull, brutish, boring sort of evil. Sometimes they forget their place, and ask Jobs to do something he doesn't care to do.<br /><br />That's when he pulls out his toy. It looks like an iPod Touch, only a bit fatter. Jobs strokes it. The Telecom CEO's shut up.<br /><br />This iPod Touch, they know, is special. It has a prototype TMobile 3G CDMA chip, a $15/month 10GB data plan, and FaceTime. There's no voice capability, it's a pure data phone. The voice stream is VOIP.<br /><br />TMobile has nothing to lose. They'll play this game.<br /><br />This is a disruptive device. It's a computer with a net connection. It works with an external keyboard. One day it might drive an external monitor.<br /><br />It's coming one day. If not from Apple, then from someone else. (Not from HP though. They're as dead as Dell). When it comes, the Telecom market blows up.<br /><br />Whether it comes in 4 years or in 1 year is entirely up to those Telecom CEOs. They just have to keep Jobs happy ...JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-47419802521520441872010-10-06T11:07:00.001-05:002010-10-06T11:07:10.403-05:00Cricket’s $149 Android and the future $4000 Dell desktop<p>We are way past the tipping point if the <a href="http://rss.macworld.com/click.phdo?i=6081fece19ee953ebcf2e5bc12ff8b4e">no contract $149 Android phone</a> is real [1]. The replacement for the <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/07/buying-my-xp-netbook.html">$150 ChromeOS Netbook</a> has come before the netbook, and <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/09/80-ultra-portable-in-unexpected-form.html">Google’s $80 ultra-portable</a> (with <strike>FM radio</strike> a cell phone too!) is a year ahead of schedule – though Microsoft’s lawsuits will slow things down.</p> <p>After the lawsuits settle down the contract free low end iPhone will go for $250 in 2012 and Android will hit a billion users by 2013 (including China’s forked Android phone). By then RIM, Windows Mobile and so on will be history. Nokia and Motorola will make Android phones. Microsoft will be an IP parasite, a shadow of its former self.</p> <p>So what about Dell? </p> <p>Here’s where it gets funny. I’m used to thinking Dell will go away. After all, even today’s phones can have external monitors and keyboards. Who needs a Dell after 2012?</p> <p>Well, verticals will. Software development. Servers. </p> <p>Thing is, vertical gear doesn’t sell for $800 a pop. Remember what Sun workstations cost when Sun was profitable? Desktop prices are going to start going up, and up. By 2013 I expect Dell will sell far fewer machines – but they’ll be much more expensive. One day we will see the $4000 desktop, even as much of Africa carries a supercompter in their pocket.</p> <p>[1] But what will it cost after the patent suits?</p> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-1656382385950078392010-09-27T08:46:00.008-05:002010-09-27T11:33:10.170-05:00The $80 ultra-portable - in unexpected formJean-Louis Gassée, once <strike>CEO of Apple</strike> head of Mac development, drops a stunner in mid-column ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.mondaynote.com/2010/09/26/the-carriers%e2%80%99-rebellion/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+monday-note+%28Monday+Note%29">The Carriers’ Rebellion | Monday Note</a><br /><br />... Google wants to see smartphones priced at $79, without subsidy, thus taking away the carriers’ opportunity to dictate features. At $79 and no contract, consumers can change handsets and carriers at will. This frees Google to have a direct relationship with the consumer, allowing their money machine—advertising today, entertainment and business services tomorrow—to run unimpeded.</blockquote>That's quite a precise number. Not "below $100", $79.<div><br /></div><div>Think about that. Take your time. I'll be back.</div><div><br /></div><div>We're talking about a computer that outclasses the desktop G3 iMac of 2001. There's no reason it couldn't work with an external monitor as well as an external keyboard. Incidentally, it's a phone too.</div><div><br /></div><div>Yeah, they're thinking big. Forget the "Chromebook" I was so excited about a year ago (though I still hope we see it). This is so much bigger.</div><div><br /></div><div>Can they do it? Today's smartphones cost about $500-$800 without a (carrier) subsidy. This seems like a big price drop -- unless you're about 50 years old. </div><div><br /></div><div>If you're old enough, you remember the calculator price drop. In a few years they went from about $500 to cereal box prizes. </div><div><br /></div><div>That never happened with computers. Instead the capabilities skyrocketed -- but the price never truly fell. A 1988 Commodore 64 and a 2010 bottom-of-the-heap netbook cost about the same. The difference was partly moving parts, calculators were almost pure silicon -- computers had drives and big power supplies and keyboards and so on. A lot of the difference though was IP protection and patent licensing.</div><div><br /></div><div>I think this would have happened to the original Palm III if it had survived, but they didn't have a business model supporting a $10 PalmOS device. Google has the business model.</div><div><br /></div><div>I don't doubt that it will be possible in 2012 to produce a somewhat junky version of a 2009 iPhone for a marginal <i>manufacturing </i>cost of less than $80 -- if you can manage the IP costs and if the payor has a separate (subsidizing) revenue stream. To do it Google will have to buy some IP, and cut deals that appeal to IP holders only when you start to talk a billion devices.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the meanwhile, China will be doing the same thing internally -- and they don't <i>really </i>worry about IP costs.</div><div><br /></div><div>Interesting times.</div>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-13715489072471560532010-04-30T08:17:00.001-05:002010-04-30T10:30:52.855-05:00Stross on the post-PC world – mostly right<p>Charles Stross is in good form with <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/04/why-steve-jobs-hates-flash.html">an essay on the post-PC world</a>. It’s the world we’ve been expecting since <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2004/10/gbrowser-google-microsoft-and-netscape.html">Netscape Constellation (1996)</a> and <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/network-meet-larry-ellison-the-software-supremo-with-an-ego-to-match-his-income-1269887.html">Larry Ellison’s proto-netbook</a> (1995). That world became real for me in <em>2007</em> (yes, it was <em>that long ago</em>) <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2007/06/apple-victorious.html">with the iPhone</a> and in 2008 with the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2008/10/microsoft-lessons-from-target-trutech.html">Target netbook</a> [1].</p> <p>I agree with almost everything he wrote, with one big exception….</p> <blockquote> <p>… Moreover, the PC revolution has saturated the market at any accessible price point. That is, anyone who needs and can afford a PC has now got one…</p> </blockquote> <p>Uhhh, no. PCs are not cheap. Not at all. <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/01/computing-for-rest-of-us-ipad-and.html">The iPad is cheap</a> [3], but PCs are very expensive.</p> <p>Yes, you can buy a “PC” for a pittance. It makes a crummy boat anchor though. If you want it to do something useful you need to buy internet service. Where I live that’s about $600 a year – year after year. Unless you bought a Mac, or are geek enough to go without, you need to buy antiviral software. In theory you also need to $150 or so for Microsoft Office. And good luck with backup.</p> <p>But that’s not the real cost.</p> <p>The real cost is that you need an IQ-equivalent of 110 or higher, and a love of debugging and troubleshooting. For most of the population, that’s absolutely unaffordable.</p> <p>PCs are very, very, expensive. <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/01/computing-for-rest-of-us-ipad-and.html">The iPad 2.0, or its rivals to come, can be the poor person’s computer</a> [4].</p> <p>So Charlie got this one point wrong – but it only strengthens his overall argument. My four month old quad core iMac running 10.6 is an anachronism [2]. Its era is passing. Welcome to the third era of the personal computer.</p> <p><font size="2">[1] I thought things would blow up in 2009. Didn’t happen! Microsoft dropped the price of XP to about nothing and crawled back enough control of the netbook to stun the market (same thing they did with Palm in the 90s by the way). It’s </font><a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html"><font size="2">still going to happen</font></a><font size="2">, but that’s not the first time I’ve been wrong on transition times. I’ve since learned to take my time estimates for technology transitions and triple them.</font></p> <p><font size="2">[2] Charlie also omits the role Digital Rights Management (<a href="http://notes.kateva.org/search/label/drm">DRM</a>) plays in driving this transition. DRM is one of the reason there’s so much good software being produced for the iPhone. Your CDs may be worth money some day.</font></p> <p><font size="2">[3] Not least because of the pay-as-you-go capped data plan. That’s as big a deal as the device. Yes, I know iPad’s require a <em>PC-as-peripheral</em>, but <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2010/04/apple-next-mobileme-becomes-ipad-host.html">that will change within the year</a>.</font></p> <p>[4] Of course that’s what the original Mac was – the “computer for the rest of us”. Closed architecture. All applications were to be vetted by Apple. Strict UI standards. Heavy investments in usability and design. Single button mouse. It worked too – it really was easy to use. Much easier to use than OS X. Almost as easy to use as the iPad. History doesn’t repeat, but sometimes it spirals.</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-62074180952548950652010-04-05T21:25:00.004-05:002010-04-05T21:34:24.511-05:00Tech churn: Cameras yes, but laptops?<div>Until I saw <a href="http://superamit.tumblr.com/post/492401109/im-calling-it-now-the-laptop-starts-dying">this graphic</a> I thought the compact, point and shoot, camera was doing just fine.</div><div><br /></div><div>Right. Of course. My iPhone 3G isn't good enough to replace a point and shoot, but my June 2010 iPhone will. I haven't been paying attention.</div><div><br /></div><div>That's tech churn. From nowhere to everywhere to nowhere in no time at all. Reminds me of books on CD. </div><div><br /></div><div>So is Amit Gupta right that the iPad has made the laptop obsolete? I don't think so. A good laptop is much closer to a desktop than a Point &amp; Shoot camera is to a DSLR; there's room for both in the "pro and enthusiast" market. I do agree that specialty OSs such as ChromeOS and iPhoneOS will dominate the "everyday use" end of the market. The form factor is, however, less critical than the usability, security, business model and low operating costs of these next generation environments.</div><div><br /></div><div>Remember too that, when the market demands it, an iPhone will support a keyboard and external monitor. Then you have a phone and a laptop ...</div><small></small>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-1234996095820795682009-12-26T11:04:00.010-06:002010-01-04T11:28:50.391-06:00Tech Churn: OS X Server, MobileMe and the Cloud<div>I've been gradually working through all the expected and unexpected* consequences of moving in a new machine and sunsetting my 6+ year old XP box.</div><div><br /></div><div>Along the way I've run into another example of <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/search/label/tech%20churn">technology churn</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>In our home we have 5 users and a guest account that are distributed across four Macs - an iMac i5, MacBook dual core, iMac G5, and a surprisingly functional though immobile iBook G3 running Camino. Each machine has its own uses, and most have six accounts. </div><div><br /></div><div>It's a furball. It doesn't work well, for example, to put all personal files on an AFP share (Spotlight doesn't readily index shares, Mail and Aperture have issues with shares, there's no trash recovery post delete, etc). It's a pain to distribute passwords (keychain), credentials, desktops, etc. Let's not discuss our <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/12/retrospect-8-no-user-guide.html">modern backup mess</a>, shall we?</div><div><br /></div><div>Once upon a time the answer would have been reasonably straightforward. I'd buy a used Mac Mini, stick OS X server and two 2TB firewire drives (one backup and one local) and do manage desktops.</div><div><br /></div><div>Except Apple's iCal server fiasco tells me their server team is in disarray. There's also a relatively modern alternative to consider; at one time <a href="http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/08/13/inside-mobileme-iphones-exchange-alternative-for-contacts-and-calendar/">this is what MobileMe was marketed for</a>. It was have been kind of OS X server in the Cloud, accessible both from the home firewall and from remote clients. (As of 10.6, incidentally, I think a MobileMe user name/pw associated with a user account in the Accounts Preference Pane acts like a kind of (undocumented) alternative global user identifier.)</div><div><br /></div><div>So should I make good user of our <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/10/mobileme-massacre-begins.html">family MobileMe account</a>? Well, I'm kind of doing that, but there's churn there too. MobileMe has been caught in the iPhone, photo sharing, Google Apps and Facebook swhirlpool. Nobody, not even Steve Jobs, seems to know what the heck to do with it.</div><div><br /></div><div>Or maybe we could extend <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2007/04/google-apps-for-our-family.html">what we've been doing for 3 years</a>, and move more of our family functions into the gCloud? If Google does deliver a $150 Chrome OS netbook then each child will have one. Maybe we should start now.</div><div><br /></div><div>Or maybe, because there's so much technological uncertainty, we should stall for time.</div><div><br /></div><div>I think we're going to stall for time -- which means some combination of an AFP share, a backup server, MobileMe synchronization and continued use of our successful family Google Apps domain. That means OS X Server stays on the shelf for at least another six months.</div><div><br /></div><div>Tech churn is a pain.</div><div><br /></div><div>See also:</div><div><ul><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/10/mobileme-massacre-begins.html">Gordon's Tech: The MobileMe Massacre begins</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2008/07/mobileme-perspective-of-crusty-palm.html">Gordon's Tech: MobileMe: Perspective of a crusty Palm veteran</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2008/10/mobileme-microsoft-outlook-exchange.html">Gordon's Tech: MobileMe, Microsoft Outlook, Exchange, iTunes and yes, sync Hell</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2007/04/google-apps-for-our-family.html">Gordon's Tech: Google Apps for our family</a></li><li><a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2007/11/shared-family-calendars-pdas-and-google.html">Gordon's Notes: Shared family calendars, PDAs and Google Android</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2007/04/reaching-for-nerdvana-integrating.html">Gordon's Tech: Reaching for Nerdvana: Integrating family and work calendars</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/11/big-switch-on-my-iphone-sync-caldav-and.html">Gordon's Tech: Big switch on my iPhone sync: CalDAV and Exchange server</a></li><li><a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/11/using-os-x-105-ical-with-google-caldav.html">Gordon's Tech: Using OS X 10.5 iCal with Google CalDAV - cleaning up import disasters</a></li></ul></div><div><b>Update 10/4/09</b>: A <i><a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2010/01/mac-mini-with-snow-leopard-server-review.ars/1">positive </a></i><a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2010/01/mac-mini-with-snow-leopard-server-review.ars/1">review of OS X 10.6 server</a> convinced me that I really don't want to go that route! If Apple does make MobileMe a sort of "OS X Server Lite" for that masses, however, I'd find value there.</div><div>--</div><div>* Such as the <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/12/my-i5-imac-and-notes-on-academic.html">27" iMac's notorious flicker problem</a> (which has been very mild for us), discovering the <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/12/imac-i5-27-screen-weve-exceeded.html">human factors limits of screen height</a>, and unexpected <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/12/logmein-os-x-32-bit-only.html">software incompatibilities with 10.6</a>.<br />--<br /><small><a href="feed://www.google.com/reader/public/atom/user/06457543619879090746/state/com.google/broadcast">My Google Reader Shared items (feed)</a></small></div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-36608413884343904062009-12-19T22:23:00.008-06:002009-12-24T00:31:05.804-06:00Google vs. Apple - Stross on the phone warsCharlie Stross is a literate geek who <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/fiction/index.html">makes a living inventing plausible worlds</a>. That's why he can write one of the best tech posts of 2009 ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/12/21st_century_phone.html">Charlie's Diary: Gadget Patrol: 21st century phone</a><br /><br />... I think Google is pursuing a grand strategic vision of destroying the cellco's entire business model — of positioning themselves as value-added gatekeepers providing metered access to content — and their second-string model of locking users in by selling them premium handsets (such as the iPhone) on a rolling contract.<br /><br />They intend to turn 3G data service (and subsequently, LTE) into a commodity, like wifi hotspot service only more widespread and cheaper to get at. They want to get consumers to buy unlocked SIM-free handsets and pick cheap data SIMs. They'd love to move everyone to cheap data SIMs rather than the hideously convoluted legacy voice stacks maintained by the telcos; then they could piggyback Google Voice on it, and ultimately do the Google thing to all your voice messages as well as your email and web access...</blockquote><div>Please go now and read the entire essay ...</div><div><br /></div><div>... Fun, isn't it? Charlie can write.</div><div><br /></div><div>Charlie compares Apple to high end and luxury auto companies. It's an old metaphor, but it works. Extending that metaphor, what Google wants to do is deliver the Model T platform -- a super-cheap internet-connected phone and netbook for use in Detroit, Seoul, Kabul and Kampala.</div><div><br /></div><div>2010 will be a very interesting tech year.</div>--<br /><small><a href="feed://www.google.com/reader/public/atom/user/06457543619879090746/state/com.google/broadcast">My Google Reader Shared items (feed)</a></small>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-56393833914986201922009-12-17T22:26:00.004-06:002009-12-17T22:34:07.113-06:00The ChromeBook rumors grow<a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">We've been expecting this</a>, though we thought it would be earlier ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/17/get-ready-for-the-google-branded-chrome-os-netbook/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader">Get Ready For The Google Branded Chrome OS Netbook</a><div><br /></div><div>... Google has, according to multiple sources, been talking to at least one hardware manufacturer about building a netbook for Google directly. As in Google gave the company a RFP with quite detailed technical specifications and has begun discussions on building it.<br /><br />They’re not in any particular hurry and seem to be aiming for the 2010 holiday season, a full year from now. Our understanding is that Google intends to have the devices built, branded with Google, and then sell them directly to consumers. The only firm tech spec we’ve heard is that <b>they’ll be mobile enabled, and likely tied to one or more carriers with a subsidy</b>.<br /><br />... I’d even go out on a limb and suggest that they may very well be targeting Nvidia’s Tegra line. Those chips are outperforming Atom in every way, say some of the hardware guys we know. HD Flash video no problem (something the Atom can’t do), and at a fraction of the power usage.<br /><br />What does that mean? It means next Christmas you may be getting a high performance Google branded netbook running Chrome OS for next to nothing. And if it’s running ARM, Intel is going to be freaking the hell out about it...</div></blockquote>I speculated last February that Google would eventually have to split the company if this takes off. I think it <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2008/12/why-google-loves-chrome-netscape.html">will</a> <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">be</a> <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html">huge</a>.<br />--<br /><small><a href="feed://www.google.com/reader/public/atom/user/06457543619879090746/state/com.google/broadcast">My Google Reader Shared items (feed)</a></small>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-60155503711361412642009-11-20T16:42:00.002-06:002009-11-20T16:52:22.548-06:00How much is the gBook in the Window?<div>So yesterday Google does a presser on their coming Chrome OS ("<a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html">chromestellation</a>") netbook. Buried away, and rarely reported, Google's Sundar Pichai says ...</div><blockquote>Q: Do you know what this Chrome OS netbooks will cost?<br />SP: You will hear that from our partners. They will be in the price range that people are used to for netbooks today. But it’s hard to predict a year from now. Also remember, they will be bigger.</blockquote>Huh?<div><br /></div><div>The <i>price range people are used to netbooks today</i>?! </div><div><br /></div><div>Err, that <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/125-barbie-b-smart-netbook-of-2011.html">wasn't</a> <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">what</a> I was <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/pc-chaos-rise-of-150-netbook.html">expecting</a>. What am I, wrong?!</div><div><br /></div><div>Who cares about "<i>bigger</i>", we want cheap, cheap, <i>cheap</i>! We want that sucker under $150 (battery extra).</div><div><br /></div><div>Not everyone heard Mr. Pichai ...<blockquote><a href="http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/11/19/what-chromeos-means-for-netbooks-and-why-microsoft-needs-to-be-scared/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader">What ChromeOS Means For Netbooks And Why Microsoft Needs To Be Scared</a></blockquote><blockquote>... ChromeOS may not be powerful, it may not play Far Cry and it may not run Microsoft Office but it’s a game changer. The underpowered laptops that limped along under Vista, XP, or 7 will fly under a new ChromeOS regime and thin-and-light laptops will fall below the vaunted $199 mark as the so-called “Microsoft Tax” – basically the small cost manufacturers pay for OEM licenses – disappears."..</blockquote>The XP tax, by the way, is less than $25.</div><div><br /></div><div>If Google intends to sell a Netbook at $400 then Microsoft can relax.<br /><br /></div><div>I hate being <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/10/google-branded-netbook-is-coming-in.html">wrong</a>.</div><div>--<br /><small><a href="feed://www.google.com/reader/public/atom/user/06457543619879090746/state/com.google/broadcast">My Google Reader Shared items (feed)</a></small></div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-34311272689127409282009-10-21T21:51:00.006-05:002009-11-20T16:53:31.990-06:00The Google branded netbook is coming in early 2010This rumor is mostly about the Google phone, but that's not the interesting part (emphases mine) ...<div><blockquote><a href="http://gigaom.com/2009/10/20/real-google-phone/">There Really Might Be a Google Phone. No Seriously!</a><br /><br />... According to Kumar, Google will embed the same iteration of Android as the one currently being used in the Motorola Droid and the device will be based on Qualcomm baseband chips. Google will <b>also introduce its own branded netbook, again embedding Qualcomm Snapdragon, early next year</b>...</blockquote>That's <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html">Google Chromestellation</a>, a version of this netbook will probably be sold through Verizon -- "free" with a 2 year data services contract.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Update 10/23/09</b>: By chance I came across <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2004/12/laptops-become-commodity.html">a post I wrote in 2004</a>:</div><div><blockquote><blockquote><a href="http://weblog.infoworld.com/techwatch/archives/000931.html">InfoWorld: Wal-Mart breaks price barrier with Linspire Linux laptop</a><br /><br />Wal-Mart is offering a laptop that dives below the $500 pricepoint, and it's no accident the machine, from Linspire, runs a Linux-based operating system.<br /><br />The Balance laptop, at $498, enters a mass market at a price that will undoubtedly accelerate Linux adoption.<br /><br />The laptop comes with the OS, Internet suite, and Microsoft-file compatible office suite and can be used with both dial-up modems and broadband connections. The machine comes with a VIA C3, 1.0 GHz processor, 128 MB of RAM, which is expandable up to 512 MB with SODIMM (Small Outline Dual In-line Memory Modules). It includes a CD-ROM drive and a 14.1-inch LCD screen...<br /><br />... The laptop's included Mozilla Internet suite comes with a fast-functioning browser and email program that can display Web-based forms, PDF documents, images, and multimedia files. The suite's included instant messenger program works with AOL, MSN and Yahoo logins.</blockquote><hr />No-one makes money on desktop machines. I recall reading that if one excluded the kickbacks Microsoft provided Dell, that they lost money on their best selling desktop machines. Laptops were different -- they still had a solid margin.<br /><br />Not any more. Only Apple will be able to demand a premium for their top selling entry-level laptops, and the iBook may drop to $900 or so. Updrade this thing to 512MB and hook it up to a monitor/mouse/kb and there's a very compact and virus-free machine for my mother to use -- with gmail for her email.</blockquote></div><div>*Cough*.</div><div><br /></div><div>So five years ago I predicted that only Apple would be able to demand a premium for laptops (sort of true, but I was thinking 1 year) and that the "iBook" would drop to $900 (MacBook is now $999 - but this isn't 2005).</div><div><br /></div><div>I think I'd better temper my Netbook optimism a wee bit.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Update 11/20/09</b>: <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/11/how-much-is-gbook-in-window.html">It's late 2010 and it won't be cheap</a>?! Wow. I sure missed this one!</div><div><br /></div><div>--<br /><small><a href="feed://www.google.com/reader/public/atom/user/06457543619879090746/state/com.google/broadcast">My Google Reader Shared items (feed)</a></small></div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-74178110713717329632009-10-13T13:45:00.004-05:002009-10-13T13:54:25.184-05:00Nokia netbook exposes future AT&T wireless data plansAT&amp;T has added Nokia's Win 7 "netbook" (a $600 mini-laptop with a very slow CPU) to its lineup. The 2 year contract price is $200, but they really don't intend to sell many ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/nokias-netbook-comes-with-marathon-battery-life/">Nokia’s Netbook Comes With Marathon Battery Life - Bits Blog - NYTimes.com</a></blockquote><blockquote><a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/nokias-netbook-comes-with-marathon-battery-life/"></a>... At the event, Glenn Lurie, the president of AT&amp;T’s emerging device unit, said he understood that a <b>$60-a-month data plan</b> puts the device out of the range of many potential consumers. He said that AT&amp;T will introduce other data plans with lower prices before the end of the year, possibly including prepaid plans and those that charge users only for the days they are actually online...</blockquote>At $60/month AT&amp;T is basically saying "don't buy this, you fool!". Their iPhone demolished network can't handle widespread netbook adoption.<div><br /></div><div>I wonder if they had some kind of contractual launch agreement they couldn't dodge. This is really a silly launch.</div><div><br /></div><div>The real news here, other than confirmation that Nokia is doomed, is that AT&amp;T is going to give up on "all you can eat pricing".</div><div><br /></div><div>That's a good thing - <i>assuming we continue to real competition </i>between Verizon, AT&amp;T and Sprint/T-mobile. Flat rate pricing for a capacity constrained service is economic lunacy -- a lose-lose formula for AT&amp;T and customers alike.</div><div><br /></div><div>Meanwhile, we all wait for the launch of the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html">Verizon-Google Chrome OS netbook</a> -- the day the roof comes down.</div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-82904387128422751622009-10-06T13:23:00.002-05:002009-10-28T14:53:28.959-05:00Verizon to support Google Voice on Android phonesIt's good to learn that Google and Verizon are partnering to deliver better Android devices.<br /><br />That's not surprising though. The surprising bit is the support for Google Voice ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=220301298">Verizon, Google Team For Android Devices -- Smartphones -- InformationWeek</a></blockquote><blockquote><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/business/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=220301298"></a>... Verizon said its Android devices will come with the Android Market preloaded, and <b>the wireless operator will support Google Voice</b>. Verizon will be preloading some of its apps onto the devices, as well as tailoring the OS to provide a distinctive user experience..."</blockquote>Doesn't Verizon make money on phone calls and SMS? Why are they going to support GV? I'd like to learn more. On the face of it, a nice kick at AT&amp;T/Apple.<div><br /></div><div>The "preloading" and "tailoring" sound ominous though.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>Update</b>: The first go-round I missed the key part of the announcement. The alliance goes beyond Android phones. It's also going to include collaboration on "netbooks". Netbooks, as in <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html">Google Chromestellation</a>. Wow. </div><div><br /></div><div>I'd forgotten what <i>real</i> competition was like. The<a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/apple-google-war-battle-of-google-voice.html"> Apple-Google wars</a> are about to become the Apple/AT&amp;T - Google/Verizon wars - and Microsoft is on the sidelines.</div><div><br /></div><div>2010 looks to be another interesting year, but this time with some good news for consumers.</div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-42984487091969816802009-07-12T09:18:00.006-05:002009-10-28T14:53:28.960-05:00The post-lead era: living with less reliable electronic hardwareYears ago most of my computer problems were related to local software bugs. Those were the days before OS X 10.3 and XP SP2. (Ok, so 10.5 was a regression until about 10.5.6 -- the iPhone drained a lot of Apple's brain power early in 10.5 development.)<div><br /></div><div>Excluding the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/06/requiem-for-gerserker-gordons-laws-of.html">nightmare of my corporate XP environment</a>, I really don't run into that many serious software related problems at home.</div><div><br /></div><div>Instead, I run into hardware problems. They're <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/07/airport-extreme-firmware-update-and.html">worse</a>, because they can be really tough to diagnose. You can undo software installs, install new versions, restore from backup, etc -- but hardware is expensive to experiment with.</div><div><br /></div><div>Everything fails sooner or later, like <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/05/managing-failing-canadian-videotron.html">my mother's (8-10yo?) cable modem</a> or my <a href="http://tech.kateva.org/2009/07/airport-extreme-firmware-update-and.html">vintage (6 yo) AirPort Extreme Base Station</a>, or one of my half-dozen hard drives (half-life 2 years) or cheap router/access points (half-life 1 year). </div><div><br /></div><div>So things are already tough enough, but unfortunately they're likely to get worse. This rant about lead-free solder isn't new, but it's a timely reminder ...<blockquote><div><a href="http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/apple/index.html#d11jul2009">Macintouch - reader report July 2009</a><div><br /></div>... the lead-free solder mandate has changed the rules. The lead-free directive became mandatory everywhere last year so anecdotes about what was true prior to then are not accurate representations of the realities now.</div><div><br /></div><div>I am the technical chair for a major electronics wafer and IC/ MEMS/ optoelectronics assembly and packaging conference scheduled for this fall. My technical planning team, with electronics manufacturing experts from many countries, has lined up experts from 19 countries to address better ways to deal with lead-free solder and other reliability and manufacturing issues.</div><div><br /></div><div>I can assure you that the soldering problems are not unique to Apple--it is a frightening global problem. If you want some specifics, check out the following on lead-free solder problems items below.</div><div><br /></div><div>Tin is the major metal in ALL lead-free solder alloys being used today by Intel, AMD, IBM and others. Tin is known to produce "tin whiskers" (dendritic growths) which cause electrical shorts if there is humidity in the area where equipment operates.</div><div><br /></div><div>At a DuPont R&amp;D facility several years ago, I saw USAF cruise missile (intended to carry a nuclear warhead) with a guidance system [on] printed wiring boards where tin dendritic growths had created new logic paths, thus enabling the missile to pick its own target. Not desirable. This is one reason the military avoids high tin content lead-free solders.</div><div><br /></div><div>Cadillac, at about the same time, had an engine computer that would accelerate, change engine power levels abruptly or stop the engine, much to the driver's chagrin. It cost GM millions to recall and replace the faulty circuits.</div><div><br /></div><div>The USA lost a multibillion dollar recon satellite last year because of lead-free solder failure problems, so it is not just a computer problem.</div><div><br /></div><div>You can read "Lead-free solder: A train wreck in the making" from Military and Aerospace Electronics magazine ...</div><div><br /></div><div>... The bottom line:</div><div><br /></div><div>Lead-free solders used today simply cannot make as reliable mechanical bonds or as reliable electrical interconnects as older eutectic solders with 100 years of proven reliability.</div><div><br /></div><div>This makes virtually all electronic products vulnerable to early failure....</div></blockquote><div></div></div>So we can expect our device lifespans, from computers to routers, to shorten. How can we respond? <div><br /></div><div>I suspect there will be several responses, partly planned and partly emergent:</div><div><ul><li>Outsource the hardware -- switch to the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/07/google-chromestellation-has-landed.html?showComment=1247057180735">Google Book Chrome OS (Chromestellation)</a>. This device moves most of the hardware problems to Google. Their 2011/2012 Google branded netbooks will be very cheap, almost disposable. If there are reliability issues, buy a new one.</li><li>Buy top quality with extended warrantees. Our costs will rise of course.</li><li>Build in much better self-diagnostics: We're definitely seeing this. A lot more devices are including their own self-test software. IBM used to market this sort of thing in the 90s and I'm sure it's been a part of mainframe technology since the 1970s.</li><li>Follow <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2008/01/gordons-4-rules-of-acquisition.html">Gordon's Laws of Acquisition</a> and L<a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/06/requiem-for-gerserker-gordons-laws-of.html">aws of Geekery.</a> More simply, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Reliable hardware is the proverbial bird in the hand.</li></ul></div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-58912308508691248762009-07-10T09:56:00.001-05:002009-07-10T09:57:22.780-05:00The Google Netbook is all about two things, and the big one is cheaper<p>How can it be that the vast majority of my fellow bloviators are ignoring what Google is saying here …</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/google-ceo-spent-six-years-saying-no-to-operating-system-plans-2009-7">Google CEO Schmidt Thought Building OS Was A Lousy Idea (GOOG, AAPL, MSFT)</a></p> Schmidt now believes Google can withstand whatever counter punches Microsoft might throw as the company sets out to make computers<strong> cheaper to buy</strong> and more <strong>enjoyable to use</strong> with an operating system tied to Google's 9-month-old browser, Chrome.</blockquote> <p>Let me put this more clearly.</p> <p>Cheaper.</p> <p>Cheaper.</p> <p>Cheaper.</p> <p>Netbooks edged down the $350 range last year (Linux), but have now moved up-market to about $500 (XP for free).</p> <p>Google wants them to be … cheaper. Cheaper to buy, cheaper to own.</p> <p>I think they’re aiming for under $150 without a battery and without a wireless contract, and free with a Kindle-like Sprint/4G network plan.</p> <p>I think the long delay from announcement is all about regs for the Sprint/4G plan and I wouldn’t rule out Google buying Sprint to enable that for the US market.</p> <p>The Google Netbook will be very cheap, it will be Google certified if not Google branded, and it will be cheap but reasonably reliable.</p> <p>It will be extremely disruptive.</p> <p>Oh … and “enjoyable to use”? He means vastly fewer hassles.</p> <p>Really, it’s not that complicated.</p> <p>Sure is disruptive though.</p> <p>I do like Google.</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-75694456609577049002009-07-08T00:25:00.006-05:002009-10-28T14:53:28.961-05:00Google Chromestellation has landed, the Netbook wars begin again<div>Last December I wrote about <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2008/12/why-google-loves-chrome-netscape.html">Google Chromestellation</a>. I was <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">excited about it</a>. Subsequently Microsoft <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/how-microsoft-can-win-netbook-wars.html">counterpunched the Netbook gang by giving away XP</a>. They gave up a lot of revenue to keep the wolves at bay.</div> <div> <br /></div> <div>It's worked, Linux Netbooks are in retreat and prices have stayed at the $400 and up range. Netbook prices haven't fallen into disruptive $150 range.</div> <div> <br /></div> <div>Microsoft won the first battle of the Netbook War.</div> <div> <br /></div> <div>Today the second battle began ...</div> <blockquote><a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html">Official Google Blog: Introducing the Google Chrome OS</a> <br /> <br />It's been an exciting nine months since we launched the Google Chrome browser ... today, we're announcing a new project that's a natural extension of Google Chrome — the Google Chrome Operating System. It's our attempt to re-think what operating systems should be. <br /> <br /><b>Google Chrome OS is an open source, lightweight operating system that will initially be targeted at netbooks</b>. Later this year we will open-source its code, and netbooks running Google Chrome OS will be available for consumers in the <b>second half of 2010</b>. Because we're already <b>talking to partners</b> about the project, and we'll soon be working with the open source community, we wanted to share our vision now so everyone understands what we are trying to achieve. <br /> <br />Speed, simplicity and security are the key aspects of Google Chrome OS. We're designing the OS to be fast and lightweight, to start up and get you onto the web in a few seconds. The user interface is minimal to stay out of your way, and <b>most of the user experience takes place on the web</b>. And as we did for the Google Chrome browser, we are going back to the basics and<b> completely redesigning the underlying security architecture of the OS</b> so that users don't have to deal with viruses, malware and security updates. It should just work. <br /> <br />Google Chrome OS will run on both <b>x86 as well as ARM chips</b> and we are <b>working with multiple OEMs</b> to bring <b>a number of netbooks</b> to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on <b>top of a Linux kernel</b>. For application developers, the web is the platform. All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies. And of course, these apps will run not only on Google Chrome OS, but on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux thereby giving developers the largest user base of any platform. <br /> <br />Google Chrome OS is a new project, <b>separate from Android</b>... <br /></blockquote> Chromestellation, the modern Chrome version of Netscape Constellation, is now real. <div> <br /></div> <div>I expect Google will brand some of those OEM Netbooks and they will be sold for very little money. When used on WiFi they will be advertising delivery systems. They will be useable on mobile phone networks with metered use, a certain amount of use may be paid for by ads.</div> <div> <br /></div> <div>Microsoft will fight like Hell.</div> <div> <br /></div> <div>This is going to be fun.</div> <div> </div> <div><strong>Update 7/8/09</strong>: The <a href="http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/2009/07/lets-all-take-deep-breath-and-get-some.html">best commentary I’ve read so far</a> came from the reincarnation of Fake Steve Jobs. It’s a parody of course, but FSJ always has a serious message. I read it as saying:</div> <ul> <li>It will hurt Microsoft by forcing them to lower Windows 7 pricing.</li> <li>It will hurt Apple more than Microsoft (presumably because Microsoft is impregnable in the business market, Apple is vulnerable in the home market).</li> <li>It will be a money loser for Google and it won’t have much impact on the world</li> </ul> <p>I think everyone would agree it puts pressure on Win 7 netbook prices. I think Apple users are a different market, but I agree Apple will be vulnerable.</p> <p>I disagree on the third one. I think Google is aiming for a huge market that currently has little relationship with the Net and with computers.</p><p><span style="font-weight: bold;">Update 7/9/09</span>: The NYT has two strong commentaries, one of which refers obliquely to Netscape Constellation:</p><ul><li><a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/the-incredible-shrinking-operating-system/?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">Shrinking Operating System</a></li><li><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/technology/internet/09google.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">Rival to Windows</a></li></ul>There are many millions of people in the US alone that do very little on their computer, or who live with virus infested machines that routinely crash, or who don't have a working computer because they can't afford to buy or, more importantly, maintain a modern OS.<br /><br />Google is aiming straight at this group. Microsoft is nowhere near them.<br /><br />At the same time there are many families with one or two computers and 3-5 family members. They really need more machines, but they'd be fine with 1 Mac (say) and 4 GooBooks (goobook.com, btw, has been registered).<br /><br />Microsoft can and will respond to this threat, but they will be badly hurt. That's good news for Apple; my hunch is that Google's entry will so weaken Microsoft that the net effect for the Mac will be relatively neutral.<br /><p><br /></p><p></p>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-38345574461117763342009-06-09T13:03:00.000-05:002009-10-28T14:53:28.961-05:00Google's HTML 5 - the netbook chromestellation platform<p>It’s been a few months since I’ve last written about the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">netbook chromestellation platform</a> (Google Chrome + Netscape Constellation 1996). There’s been little of interest on the netbook side, except that Microsoft has successfully executed <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/how-microsoft-can-win-netbook-wars.html">their only logical response – make XP effectively free on the Netbook</a>. Price points have not yet fallen into <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/125-barbie-b-smart-netbook-of-2011.html">the truly disruptive range</a>.</p> <p>On the software side though, we now have Google’s technology preview from their I/O conference: <a href="http://code.google.com/events/io/sessions/GoogleHTML5Work.html">Google I/O - Google's HTML 5 Work: What's Next?</a>.</p> <p>One surprise is what a large role Apple has played. Clearly they made the right strategic choice when they split from Mozilla to create Safari/WebKit and introduced Canvas. Apple and Google are precisely aligned now, and both are pushing the vision of a browser as a technology platform. (From a very different direction, so is Palm.)</p> <p>Another surprise is that the standards groups have abandoned the slow pace of seven years ago and resumed the 1990s model of adopting whatever the leaders are doing. HTML “5” today is nothing like HTML “5” of 2004.</p> <p>It’s everyone against Microsoft now, rather than the 1990s Sun vs. Netscape vs. Microsoft battle (Microsoft hardly had to lift a finger in that one – Netscape and Sun killed one another). If you add the EU in then maybe it’s almost a fair fight, but Microsoft is immensely profitable and Windows 7 is due*.</p> <p>So now we wait for the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">Google branded Cloud-powered $150 HTML 5 netbook</a> …</p> <p>* Windows 7 will sell so much hardware and software, it might inflate .com bubble 2.0.</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-57686991240323083732009-05-24T18:36:00.000-05:002009-05-24T18:36:28.143-05:00How Apple could surpriseWe know what to <a href="http://daringfireball.net/2009/05/the_next_iphone">expect for our July iPhone</a>. Sounds excellent. I'll buy&nbsp;one.<br /><br />Sad not to have any surprises though.<br /><br />Unless ... how about a combo display, keyboard, battery and iphone cradle for, say, $250?<br /><br />Add iPhone, get netbook.JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-44305481667637486972009-04-26T17:42:00.001-05:002009-04-26T17:42:28.294-05:00Android netbook – things start to get interesting again<p>The Netbook news has been boring lately. Lots of <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/04/microsofts-holds-netbook-ground-at-cost.html">junky $500 machines running XP</a> – viral fodder basically. Heck, that’s in range of a used MacBook. No news there, except that $25/machine XP licensing has torn a hole in Microsoft’s profit. Instead of making an insane profit they’re only making an obscene profit.</p> <p>Things only <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">get interesting</a> when the crummy little buggers fall below $150. Anything else, short of a $250 5” diagonal iTouch from Apple, is <em>boring</em>.</p> <p>So this report is interestingly only because it’s a marker of the drive to $150 …</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10227770-1.html">Report: First Android Netbook to cost $250 | Crave - CNET</a> </p> <p>The Alpha 680, as the laptop is known as, is going through final testing at Guangzhou Skytone Transmission Technologies, Skytone co-founder Nixon White told the site. </p> <p>The Netbook uses a 533MHz ARM 11 CPU and sports a 7-inch LCD screen, <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/peripherals/">keyboard</a>, touchpad, and built-in <a href="http://reviews.cnet.com/networking-wifi/">Wi-Fi</a>, according to the report. However, the Alpha 680's 2-cell battery will last <strong>only two to four hours while surfing the Internet</strong>, much lower than the expected 12 hours. </p> <p>… manufacturers attempt to drive the price of Netbooks to around $200 or less…</p> </blockquote> <p>The Alpha 680 will be quickly forgotten of course. The big one will be <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">the Google branded netbook</a> debuting at $180.</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-45157532739054404242009-04-08T19:28:00.001-05:002009-04-10T15:55:19.209-05:00Microsoft's holds Netbook ground - at a costI've been predicting that <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/empire-strikes-back-microsoft-launches.html">the Netbook would be very bad news for Microsoft</a>. So what should one make of this story ...<div><blockquote><a href="http://www.informationweek.com/news/windows/operatingsystems/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=216402927&amp;subSection=News"><span style="color:black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="text-decoration: none;">Microsoft: 96% Of Netbooks Run Windows -- InformationWeek</span></span></a>:</blockquote><blockquote>'It's hard to believe it's been a year since we first started to see netbook PCs running Windows come to market,' said Brandon LeBlanc, Microsoft's in-house Windows blogger, in a post Friday.</blockquote><blockquote>Citing figures from market research firm NPD, LeBlanc said Windows' share of the U.S. netbook market has ballooned from less than 10% in the first half of 2008 to 96% as of February. 'The growth of Windows on netbook PCs over the last year has been phenomenal,' wrote LeBlanc. NPD defines netbooks as devices that feature a screen that is 10.2 inches or smaller and sell for less than $500."</blockquote>Should I admit defeat?<br /><br />Hah! The key is the $500 pricepoint (BTW, the NYT claims the penetration is closer to 80% for XP). The <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/technology/02netbooks.html?_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss&amp;pagewanted=all" style="text-decoration: none;">NYTimes tells us</a> that Microsoft is now charging $25 for XP, or about 5% of the unit cost (vs $73 for Vista). For that amount XP is a bargain, and it makes sense that Microsoft would take the market.<br /><br />$500 is not the price point where things get interesting. That price point is $150 and below, at which point a $25 OS would be 16% of the unit cost.<br /><br />Microsoft can still compete, by lowering the cost of XP or Windows 7 Lite to $15 a copy or less. The problem is they won't be making much money that far down, so <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/how-microsoft-can-win-netbook-wars.html">they're going to have to build other companion businesses</a> even as they pretty much give away their OS.<br /><br />Not good news for revenues, but things could get nastier if the truly low end machines can't run XP or Windows 7 ...<br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/technology/02netbooks.html?_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss&amp;pagewanted=all"><span style="color:black;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="text-decoration: none;">Thin and Inexpensive Netbooks Affect PC Industry - NYTimes.com</span></span></a></blockquote><blockquote>The industry is buzzing this week about these devices at a telecommunications conference in Las Vegas, and consumers will see the first machines on shelves as early as June, probably from the netbook pioneers Acer and Asustek.</blockquote><blockquote>“The era of a <b>perfect Internet computer for $99</b> is coming this year,” said Jen-Hsun Huang, the chief executive of Nvidia, a maker of PC graphics chips that is trying to adapt to the new technological order. “The primary computer that we know of today is the basic PC, and it’s dying to be reinvented.”... </blockquote><blockquote>... “A broad shift in the consumer market toward low-cost PCs would clearly put pressure on the revenues of nearly every player in the value chain, from component suppliers to retailers,” wrote A. M. Sacconaghi, a securities analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein &amp; Company, in a report last month. “However, we believe the impact would be especially negative for Intel and Microsoft, who today enjoy near monopoly positions in their respective markets.”</blockquote><blockquote>... Some of the devices feel more like toys or overgrown phones than full-featured computers. Still, they are the big success story in the PC industry, with sales predicted to double this year, even as <b>overall PC sales fall 12 percent,</b> according to the research firm Gartner. By the end of 2009, <b>netbooks could account for close to 10 percent</b> of the PC market, an astonishing rise in a short span.</blockquote><blockquote>Netbooks have trouble running demanding software like games and photo-editing programs. They cater instead to people who spend most of their time dealing with online services and want a cheap, light device they can use on the go. Most of the netbooks sold today run on an Intel chip called Atom, which is a lower-cost, lower-power version of the company’s standard laptop chips. And about <b>80 percent of netbooks run Windows XP</b>, the older version of Microsoft’s flagship software.</blockquote><blockquote>The new breed of netbooks, built on cellphone innards, threatens to disrupt that oligopoly.</blockquote><blockquote>Based on an architecture called ARM, from ARM Holdings in Britain, cellphone chips consume far less power than Atom chips, and they combine many functions onto a single piece of silicon. At around <b>$20, they cost computer makers less than an Atom chip</b> with its associated components.</blockquote><blockquote>But the ARM chips come with a severe trade-off — they cannot run the major versions of Windows or its popular complementary software.</blockquote><blockquote>Netbook makers have turned to Linux, an open-source operating system that costs $3 instead of the $25 that Microsoft typically charges for Windows XP. They are also exploring the possibility of using the Android operating system from Google, originally designed for cellphones....</blockquote><blockquote>... Mr. Burchers said a number of companies already making netbooks would show a new round of machines using cellphone chips at the <b>Computex trade show in Taipei, Taiwan, this June</b>.</blockquote><blockquote>Qualcomm, the San Diego company that built an empire on chips for cellphones, recently introduced <b>Snapdragon</b>, a chip created for smartphones and ultralight computers. Already, the company has announced deals to sell the chip to 15 major device manufacturers, including LG, Acer, Samsung and Asustek. Qualcomm said some Snapdragon devices appearing this year would have screens of 10 to 12 inches.</blockquote><blockquote>.... In its last quarter, Microsoft posted<b> the first sales decline in its history for the PC version of Windows</b>. It blamed netbooks for the drop. On average, Microsoft charges computer makers <b>$73 for Windows Vista</b>, the version of Windows used in desktop and high-powered laptop PCs...</blockquote>One caveat. When Mr. Huang talks about $99 Internet computers this year he's dissembling. He's referring to machines that cost $99 when purchases with a two year data services contract. In other words, they're real cost is $300 or so -- not yet revolutionary.<br /><br />The revolution comes when the real price of the netbook hits $150. That will come when the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/03/netbook-doom-google-drops-hammer.html">GoogleBook powered by Android</a> and pre-loaded with Google software is sold in a Target near you in 2010.<br /><br />That's when Microsoft shareholders will really feel the Netbook pain.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Update 4/10/09</span>: Interesting footnote - Microsoft protects their laptop market by <a href="http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/netting-more-memory-for-netbooks/?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">restricting Netbooks using XP to only 1GB of memory</a>.<br /></div>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-32361182567568537482009-03-10T15:55:00.002-05:002009-10-28T14:53:28.962-05:00The Apple Chromestellation Netbook: OS X mobile + Safari + MobileMe. What role AT&T?<p>Peter Burrows almost has it right. He forgets that the iTouch is running OS X (albeit a strange spinoff of 10.x at this time) but he's close ...</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ByteOfTheApple/blog/archives/2009/03/the_big_questio.html?campaign_id=rss_blog_byte_of_the_apple">The Big Question About The Rumored Apple NetBook: Will It Run MacOS? - Peter Burrows BusinessWeek</a></p> <p>Dow Jones Newswires <a href="http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200903092306DOWJONESDJONLINE000660_FORTUNE5.htm">is confirming </a>reports <a href="http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090309PB204.html">yesterday</a> that Apple plans to introduce a Netbook. The story says that Taiwanese display maker Wintek Corp. is providing 9.7 to 10 inch screens to huge PC contract manufacturer Quanta Computer, and that the device will be on the market in the second half of the year.</p> <p>.. One good guess is that it’s the world’s biggest iPod Touch, rather than the world’s smallest Mac. Such a device would not run the MacOS ... better for browsing the Net and watching your movies and such via iTunes, not to mention less demanding games and other graphically-oriented programs found on the App Store. And if the device had a real keyboard...</p> </blockquote> <p>Everyone's responding, as they should, to the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/netbook-train-rumbles-onwards-heading.html">collapse of the laptop pricepoint</a> and to the coming <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">Google branded</a> <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">Chromestellation netbook</a>. Microsoft will <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/empire-strikes-back-microsoft-launches.html">give away a Netbook version of Windows 7 tied to Windows Live</a>, so what will Apple do?</p> <p>A zillion people have noted that the Apple iTouch is basically a keyboard-free $230 small display netbook, now with about 25,000 App Store applications including the <span style="font-weight: bold;">Amazon Kindle</span>.<br /></p> <p>Add a keyboard and a bigger display and Apple has a $300 Netbook with a browser that uses the same AppKit engine that powers Chromestellation. This can compete with a $200 generic Linux netbook.</p> <p>Apple also has a currently feeble (albeit slowly improving) online companion - MobileMe. They also have something called AppleTV with video distribution via another product called, I think, "iTunes".</p> <p>So it seems Apple can't help but sell an iTouch/Netbook with media distribution and, probably, a tie to MobileMe.</p> <p>The interesting question is what role AT&amp;T or other mobile carriers might play. What does Apple's AT&amp;T contract let them do? Will Apple and AT&amp;T sell a carrier-subsidized MobileMe bound Netbook with embedded GSM 3G wireless? Will there be special prices for bulk school purchases? Will school books start being sold electronically via Amazon for display on the MacNetbook Kindle.app?<br /></p> <p>We should know by the 2009 back to school buying season.</p>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-7514524729877607382009-03-06T15:36:00.001-06:002009-03-06T15:36:53.909-06:00Netbook doom - Google drops a hammer<p>The shark's fin has breached the surface. Emphases mine (thanks Andrew):</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/04/schmidt_on_netbooks/">Google boss backs subsidized Linuxbooks • The Register</a></p> <p>Google CEO Eric Schmidt has hinted that his company - or at least its partners - will one day subsidize the purchase of <strong>extra-low-cost</strong> Linux netbooks in an effort to promote the use of its myriad <strike>cloud</strike> online services.</p> <p>&quot;What's particularly interesting about netbooks is the <strong>price point</strong>,&quot; Google's Willy Wonka told a room full of financial types this afternoon at the Morgan Stanley Technology Conference in downtown San Francisco. &quot;Eventually, it will make sense for operators and so forth to subsidize the use of netbooks so they can make services revenue and advertising revenue on the consumption. That's another new model that's coming.&quot;</p> <p>Schmidt called netbooks the &quot;next generation&quot; of the low-cost machines produced by Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative. &quot;Products today are not completely done. Things are missing. It's perfectly possible that <strong>operating systems that are Linux-based will become a significant player in that space</strong>, whereas they have historically <i>not</i> been a significant player in the PC space...</p> <p>..... Such devices could rule the world, Schmidt said, because <strike>cloud</strike> online apps are the future. &quot;Cloud computing is one of those changes that are going to happen - regardless of whether or not companies in the ecosystem want it to,&quot; he said. &quot;IT systems today are so slow in the way that they evolve...We now have an opportunity to build a whole new generation of applications that cycle much faster.&quot;.....</p> </blockquote> <p>Good reporting to this point, but the Reg is dead wrong with this prediction ...</p> <blockquote> <p>... If Google taps into this plan, you'd have to assume that Googlicious netbooks will be sold by someone other than Google. As the company has shown with its open-source Android mobile stack, Google prefers to keep the direct-sales biz at arm's length...</p> </blockquote> <p>Right. And Android has been a <em>great</em> hardware success. </p> <p>Google will not manufacture, but Google will specify and <strong>they will brand their Netbook</strong>. It's <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/02/when-will-google-20-sell-branded.html">the Google brand that will boost the price just enough to get in minimal quality</a>. Google will be responsible for the entire experience, they can't leave this up to bottom line hardware vendors.</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-49402670889600784912009-02-25T20:06:00.002-06:002009-02-25T20:09:08.532-06:00The Empire Strikes Back – Microsoft launches IP war on the netbook<p>A day after officially announcing that a slimmed down version of Windows 7 will be targeted at the netbook (no surprise), <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-files-suit-linux-violates-our-patents-2009-2">Microsoft dropped the other anvil</a>…</p> <blockquote> <p>Microsoft (MSFT) has gone and done it, they've filed suit in U.S. District Court claiming Linux violates their patents…</p> <p>No word yet on the finer points of the dispute, all we know so far is Microsoft claims eight patents were infringed…</p> </blockquote> <p>The suit was launched against a GPS vendor, but nobody thinks they’re the real target. Microsoft has targeted Linux via proxies, but this is the first time they've worn their own face.<br /></p> <p>Microsoft fully understands the threat they face …</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/squeezed-2009-netbooks-android-and.html">Gordon's Notes: Squeezed 2009: Netbooks, Android and Microsoft</a> </p> <p>… what's a netbook running Chrome and Linux but a calculator in drag? It's fundamentally complete. It's built entirely of plastic, silicon (sand) and a tiny amount of rare metals. All the technology development costs have been fully realized, and there's no vendor with true monopoly control. IP attacks won't work if China and India decide not to cooperate…</p> </blockquote> <p>Well, maybe the IP attacks won’t “work”, but they can buy time – time that’s worth hundreds of billions of dollars of revenue. Time to <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/2009/01/how-microsoft-can-win-netbook-wars.html">execute on a strategy Microsoft can win with</a> …</p> <blockquote> <p>They can do this:</p> <ol> <li>Buy the pipes, which at this time probably means building cheap to free wireless broadband networks in key markets. </li> <li>Give away XP. Charge $5 a copy for netbook manufacturers. </li> <li>Buy a slice of Dell and start making Microsoft brand netbooks. </li> <li>Create a version of Windows 7 for the netbook (they've probably already done this) that's tied to Windows Live. </li> <li>Become a bank. </li> <li>Build a retail/transaction service across 1-5.</li> </ol> <p>It's a low margin business, but they'll own it end-to-end. They ought to be able to soak up an average of $100/year/user from 2 billion users.</p> </blockquote> <p>The patent attacks will slow things down. I’m sure this strategy has its own risks. The EU won’t like it for one thing. On the other hand, Microsoft is facing disruptive annihilation. They’ve decided they don’t have a choice.</p> <p>Now things get ugly.</p><p>Look for IBM and Google to move next.<br /></p>JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5587346.post-7454123172091983922009-02-25T14:38:00.001-06:002009-02-25T14:38:04.156-06:00The $50 server platform to come<p>There are so many things, for better or for worse, people will do with this ...</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="http://i.gizmodo.com/5159399/sheevaplug-a-99-linux-pc-crammed-inside-a-wall-plug">SheevaPlug: A $99 Linux PC Crammed Inside a Wall Plug</a></p> <p>Think about it—an inexpensive Linux PC crammed inside a wall-wart plug. Something like this <a href="http://gizmodo.com/tag/sheevaplug/">SheevaPlug</a> ...</p> <p>Inside the SheevaPlug you will find a 1.2GHz, ARM-based Sheeva embedded processor, 512Mbytes of FLASH, 512Mbytes of DRAM, <strong>gigabit ethernet</strong> and a <strong>USB 2.0 port</strong>.... operates on only 5-watts of power..</p> <p>... Marvell expects the price for these devices to dip below <strong>$50.</strong> [<a href="http://www.marvell.com/featured/plugcomputing.jsp">Marvell</a> and <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB123535737573645547-lMyQjAxMDI5MzI1MzMyNTM3Wj.html">WSJ</a> via <a href="http://techreport.com/discussions.x/16466">Tech Report</a> via <a href="http://www.slashgear.com/marvell-sheevaplug-99-linux-pc-hidden-in-a-wall-wart-2435556/">Slashgear</a>]</p> </blockquote> <p>It's of a piece with the <a href="http://notes.kateva.org/search/label/netbook">netbook tsunami</a>; intensely <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology">disruptive in the Christiansen sense</a>. What makes it so disruptive, beyond price, is that it's a standard component based platform - low power consumption (so no fans, cooling, etc), Linux (so software), USB 2 (peripheral) and GB ethernet (I/O).</p> <p>There's no display of course, but there will be a slightly more expensive version with monitor connector -- or the video will route through a future USB 3.0 peripheral connector.</p> <p>The next two years will be very ... interesting. I wonder when this kind of device will become contraband.</p> <p>I remember when I first saw &quot;the web&quot; -- except it was Gopher then. Same idea though, the web was just a prettier version. I knew then the world was turning upside down.</p> <p>Same feeling the first day I used Google and called my fellow geeks over to let 'em know Alta Vista was dead.</p> <p>This is blood in the water for geeks. We can smell it ...</p> JGFhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14580785981874040314noreply@blogger.com0